AUDIO over IP - REDNET 3 & 16 Review. AES67 Sets A New Standard for Computer Audio

[jabbr]

...

The more difficult and probably harder problem to overcome is we don't yet have a great interconnect method from ethernet bridge to DAC to use those higher rates - all AES/SPDIF/Toslink are limited, ...

The limits of SPDIF are not necessarily at 192kHz.

Look at the specs of Chord Hugo TT:

Hugo TT supports up to 32-bit/384kHz audio via coax and USB, and 24-bit/192kHz over optical, plus DSD64 on all inputs and DSD128 via coax or USB (all via DoP).

And the specs of the Chord DAVE:

Outputs digital:
2x ultra-high-speed coax 768kHz dual-data mode for use with future-unannounced Chord Electronics products.

So it can (nearly all) be done using SPDIF coax!!

 

[rb2013]

  I'm waiting for the admin lady to contact me with the info to become a sponsor. After that I can talk a bit more

Cheers to that!  Need more audiophile company  'partners' on that list.
http://www.ravenna-network.com/adopting-ravenna/overview

  I wonder what happened to this?
 

Oh salt in the wounds...
 

  The problem with streaming devices with USB outputs are, no matter how great they might be at providing a clean USB signal, the USB path doesn't end at the USB output on the device. It ends at the I2S/DSD outputs on the DAC's USB interface. Most of them are poorly implemented, and devices upstream of the chain from them have no influence on this. You are only polishing half the turd. Yes a half polished turd is better than a completely dull turd, but still not the ultimate solution.
 
If only resolutions 24/192 or under are required, and you must use USB out of the server PC, a better solution is a very good USB/AES/EBU bridge like the Mutec everyone is raving about here.
 
But with devices like the Rednet 3 being on par cost wise with a Microrendu and a cheap power supply, it's a no brainer to go AOIP/AES/EBU. This is the next best thing to I2S direct if you have low jitter clocks and a clean signal coming from the bridge.

+1 Cheers to that
 
One note on the SQ change from the Mutec 3+USB to my own uber USB chain +the XU208 F-1 to the AOIP REDNET.  The stepup from 1 to 2 was noticible and welcome - bu the leap from 2 to 3 was really flooring.  Adding the Mutec as spdif reclocker - just widened the gap.
 
But this was on my main system which is highly resolving - in my office system the difference are there and noticible - but not as dramatic.
As someone has reported on a very good USB chain equaling the AOIP REDNET 16 on my other thread - so I would have to say it is of course going to be system dependent as always.
 
But here would be my current USB DDC ranking and where the AOIP stands in contrast:
REDNET 3/Cerious/Mutec 3+ (SPDIF reclocker)                                                         235
REDNET 3/Cerious Power Cord                                                                               220
Singxer F-1 DC30W/Cerious/Recovery/DCiPur/ iPur2/Startech GB LAN Iso USB               170
Mutec 3+ Smart Clock USB/Cerious Power Cord                                                        155
Singxer F-1 DC30W/Cerious/Recovery/DCiPur/ iPur2                                                   145
PUC2 Lite TeraDak DC30W/Cerious/Regen                                                               135
Singxer F-1 DC30W/Cerious                                                                                   135
DXIO Silver/TeraDak DC-30W/Cerious                                                                      130
Singxer X-1 DC30W/Cerious/Recovery/DCiPur/iPur2                                                    125
PUC2 Lite - USB power                                                                                          110
Breeze/Cerious Graph/WBT RCA Nexgen                                                                   109
Breeze DU-U8 with Cerious Graphene                                                                      108
Breeze DU-U8 (Talema version)                                                                              100
Breeze DU-U8 (BingZi version)                                                                                 95
Hydra Z with LPS                                                                                                    92
Melodious MX-U8 (upgraded caps)                                                                             85
Melodious MX-U8 (stock)                                                                                          81
Gustard U12 (upgraded caps)                                                                                    76
Gustard U12 stock                                                                                                   72
iDAC DAC2 (used as a DDC)                                                                                      65
Musiland USB3.0 US Dragon                                                                                      65
M2Tech EVO with LPS                                                                                              60
Audiophileo 2  USB Power                                                                                         50
M2Tech Hiface                                                                                                         40

 

[rb2013]

   
It's not a "burden", the argument is that it is better to do the heavy lifting i.e. upsampling/filtering/PCM>DSD etc on a powerful computer to take advantage of CPU-intensive algorithms to do the best quality upsampling, but also that it makes sense to do this on a machine further back in the chain, so that the extra noise produced by this CPU-intensive process is isolated from the simpler lower-noise device that is actually connected to the DAC.
 
This is the HQPlayer > NAA architecture and it makes a lot of sense to me. That said I don't like the HQP player interface, or lack of ALAC compatibility (unless used with Roon) and this kills that for me (though clearly not many others)
 
Here's an idea.... To me, HQP/NAA clearly has a good ethernet transport system (not player, I'm talking the transmission protocol). Does anyone know what exactly it is using for the transmission to NAA? And there are now a few decent NAA endpoints. But not everyone likes the player. I wonder if Miska would consider floating off that side of things and instead of having a player + ethernet audio transmitter combined, instead offered an option to have the ethernet transmitter part spun off into a virtual sound card - as an optional purchase. Then you could run for example a uRendu from any player over ethernet, and not just the various options currently supported.

If you read back toward the beginning of the thread - I reposted some of his comments from back in 2014 - I'll repost here:
 
Quote:

Miska

Masters Level Member

Join Date​

Apr 2010

Location​

Finland

Posts​

6,685

Blog Entries​

12
​

Originally Posted by Superdad
Software such as LMS, NAA, Vortex, or any DLNA set up are mostly what enable those "computers" to play via Ethernet.






You shouldn't put LMS or UPnP/DLNA in the same sentence with NAA, because those are vastly different... NAA is closer to AirPlay than LMS or UPnP/AV.
 
So Ethernet input DACs without a computer inside are still a rare beast. Even more so if you want one that does not require DLNA. The Sonore Rendu (and Logitech Squeezebox and the like) as an Ethernet>S/PDIF or >I2S device comes pretty close, as the processor that acts as its "renderer" has embedded code and is not running an OS. But one still has to think about server and controller s/w to feed it (if using DLNA).

UPnP is horribly complex and bad design and DLNA spec on top of it makes it even worse. So that's ruled out. Anything that is based on IP protocol on top of ethernet requires a computer, one form or another. Doing anything above IP protocol without proper OS is extremely bad idea, because you'll spend a decade trying just to perfect IP stack implementation while you end up building OS of your own while doing so which would end up being much worse implementation than anything already existing (unless you have thousands on man years to spend)...
  We are all watching for that unicorn-- the elusive Ethernet DAC!




In addition to NAA and building a NAA inside a DAC you have bunch of pro-audio gear (with ADC too) already on this area. So nothing new, but depends on what you want.



​

 
 

Miska

Masters Level Member

Join Date​

Apr 2010

Location​

Finland

Posts​

6,685

Blog Entries​

12
​

Originally Posted by tranz
Always enjoy reading your input. Do you have examples of the pro-audio gear?






For example:

Merging Horus
Focusrite RedNet
Both work with ASIO capable applications.
  Do you have a little more background on the DLNA issues, and why that would be bad for the 'perfect' audio path?




UPnP is based on complex three-party handshake based on mDNS, HTTP and XML. In UPnP, Renderer is the instance that actually performs audio reproduction is also the actual player. So it doesn't provide means for isolating audio recording/reproduction from the player functionality. Also the media streaming is based on HTTP which is really inefficient for the purpose. UPnP Media Server is pretty much just a web server with optionally media transcoding capabilities and the Renderer is player that makes requests to that web server. Control Point tells the Renderer what it should fetch from the Media Server.

Control Point doesn't really have any control over "how" the actual playback is performed, only "what".

When you want to play FLAC from MinimServer, Renderer is the one that performs all decoding and playback, MinimServer just provides the FLAC file as-is over HTTP when asked by the Renderer. If Renderer doesn't know how to play FLAC, playback fails. With more advanced Media Server, it could figure out it needs to convert 192/24 FLAC to something supported by Renderer for playback, but it's all up to black magic between the two what that intermediate format would happen to be. It could be for example MP3...

Because UPnP/AV spec doesn't define any media formats, Media Server and Renderer could have nothing in common. For that reason, there's DLNA that defines restricted small subset of formats that are "mandatory" or "optional". DLNA part doesn't cover such things as DSD at all, so a DSD and DLNA are completely unrelated. So a strictly DLNA compliant system could transfer your DSD files as MP3 or 44.1/16 WAV (mandatory) between the systems, and you wouldn't even know... (other than wonder why it sounds bad)

Renderer doesn't really support multiple alternative outputs per renderer either.


For example NAA makes remote audio devices appear just as if they were locally connected, player behaves the same as if the playback would happen locally. So it's more like the Merging/Focusrite devices above.

Signalyst - http://www.signalyst.com
Developer of HQPlayer

 

[rb2013]

   
Yes I am with you on this. It's a point many don't seem to get - it's not about what your source material is, it's about using a computer to upsample e.g. Redbook files to higher rates... Currently I have a DAC that only supports 96khz PCM, but looking to upgrade to something that does high PCM and DSD rates. It's not because I have lots of Hires or DSD material - the vast majority of my collection is Redbook - but to allow me to take advantage of upsampling.
 
Look, if we're thinking about AOIP solutions to be adopted, it simply doesn't make sense in 2016 to limit things to 192khz, when ethernet has a bandwidth far, far, far greater - you're just building-in obsolescence.
 
The more difficult and probably harder problem to overcome is we don't yet have a great interconnect method from ethernet bridge to DAC to use those higher rates - all AES/SPDIF/Toslink are limited, and USB has issues. i2s is the only other current method, or perhaps Thunderbolt. It just seems bizarre to me that in these days of massive bandwidth available we are still using methods that are severely constrained.

And that is the point - other then a i2s connection - most SPDIF recievers can't handle over 192k - some 96k.
 
So all this pie in the sky ultra high SR's is really mute for 90% of the folks out there.  i2s is itself a major problem.  This is where I think TB3 and the new USB-c will enter the picture as the likely mainstream standard.
 
Now I like upsampling as well - and have had good success upsampling my 44k Redbook to 192k (or using the 4X SoX feature).  That is a 4X upsample, is going another 2X - or 4X (that is 384k or 768k) going to make that big a difference?  Well I have tried it!  At least 384k.  And it did to a very minor degree.  So all this hand wringing over a minor improvement is silly IMHO.  It's just a 'game' being played by DDC and DAC companies to convince buyers they need the latest new SR.  A change in digital cable or better AC filtering a much bigger improvement - yet almost everyone here is using a BJC or worse and no AC filtering or one of those PS Audio regenerators (I have tried and don't like).  This part of the audio chain is so much less sexy then 768k upsampling.
 
I like the Mutec approach - extreme upsampling right at the 1G superclock then combine to output a cleaner SPDIF to the DAC.  And that does help!  I spent $850 for that...but it is incremental.
 
I'd love to see Sonore and/or Uptone uses JS's magic on a 'perfect SPDIF waveform' SPDIF reclocker...like in the Rendu Signature.

 

[rb2013]

The limits of SPDIF are not necessarily at 192kHz.

Look at the specs of Chord Hugo TT:
And the specs of the Chord DAVE:
So it can (nearly all) be done using SPDIF coax!!

+1 thanks for pointing that out!
 
DAVE can even do 768k over dual SPDIF:

Outputs digital:​

​

2x ultra-high-speed coax 768kHz dual-data mode for use with future-unannounced Chord Electronics products.​

 

 

[mhamel]

  So all this pie in the sky ultra high SR's is really mute for 90% of the folks out there.  i2s is itself a major problem.  This is where I think TB3 and the new USB-c will enter the picture as the likely mainstream standard.
 
Now I like upsampling as well - and have had good success upsampling my 44k Redbook to 192k (or using the 4X SoX feature).  That is a 4X upsample, is going another 2X - or 4X (that is 384k or 768k) going to make that big a difference?  Well I have tried it!  At least 384k.  And it did to a very minor degree.  So all this hand wringing over a minor improvement is silly IMHO.  It's just a 'game' being played by DDC and DAC companies to convince buyers they need the latest new SR.  A change in digital cable or better AC filtering a much bigger improvement - yet almost everyone here is using a BJC or worse and no AC filtering or one of those PS Audio regenerators (I have tried and don't like).  This part of the audio chain is so much less sexy then 768k upsampling.
 

 
Agreed. 
 
I'm with the Schiit guys on the ultra high SR stuff - where's the content that's truly high SR, and especially above 192KHz? There isn't much of it out there, and until or if there is, saying that 192KHz is too limiting or a dead end just doesn't make sense to me. The bulk of the content out there is Redbook, and even a lot(if not most) of the "high res" content you can buy wasn't originally mastered as such. If you have the content for it, then sure, I can see where it's a priority to have the ability to go higher than 192KHz, but that's not the case for most.

 

[mourip]

Regarding the "Wish List" for the audiophile oriented AOIP device. I agree with those ideas already put forward and want to add a couple others.
 
First. Changing the color might be a good idea. Especially for those of us with wives, domestic partners, significant others... etc.
 
I have my D16 tucked in a cabinet with blackout paper in front and the back open for cooling. 
 
I do not think that RED will pass the WAF test regardless of how amazing it sounds.
 
Black and or silver would go better in a home environment. Might as well match up with the other gear!
 
 
Second. I like the idea of a DC power port for adding an LPS but would not like to get a toss-away wall-wart with the new device when the internal PS sounds so good right now. 
 
Perhaps the new device could keep the present internal PS but have a switch for allowing external DC power. This would also allow folks to not feel like they had to spend more money to replace the wall-wart right away. Additionally having the external port specified for an easily found voltage might be good. 12v or 5v, whatever works internally. Those LPS's are easy to find and do not involve an adjustable regulator with all of the throw-away heat...

 

[mourip]

   
Agreed. 
 
I'm with the Schiit guys on the ultra high SR stuff - where's the content that's truly high SR, and especially above 192KHz? There isn't much of it out there, and until or if there is, saying that 192KHz is too limiting or a dead end just doesn't make sense to me. The bulk of the content out there is Redbook, and even a lot(if not most) of the "high res" content you can buy wasn't originally mastered as such. If you have the content for it, then sure, I can see where it's a priority to have the ability to go higher than 192KHz, but that's not the case for most.

 
+1
 
As long as we are trying to provide input for the new audiophile AOIP device lets start with 24/192. Perhaps address DSD later if the market responds...

 

[rb2013]

   
Agreed. 
 
I'm with the Schiit guys on the ultra high SR stuff - where's the content that's truly high SR, and especially above 192KHz? There isn't much of it out there, and until or if there is, saying that 192KHz is too limiting or a dead end just doesn't make sense to me. The bulk of the content out there is Redbook, and even a lot(if not most) of the "high res" content you can buy wasn't originally mastered as such. If you have the content for it, then sure, I can see where it's a priority to have the ability to go higher than 192KHz, but that's not the case for most.

I agree - but I think the point the OP was referring to was HQ Player's use of high oversampling on Redbook files to improve SQ.  This idea of oversampling to improve SQ has been around for a long time (not just in D-S DAC chips to deal with extreme switching noise).
 
I seem to remember a French audio company that used FPGA to extreme upsample RedbookCD's in their CD player - that was 10 yrs ago.
 
Now this is what Mutec is doing in there MC-3+USB.  And what the NAA does?
 
It's been around a long time - just now it's a bigger marketing buzzword 'gotta have'.
 
My APL DAC upsamples to 211k Redbook.

 

[rb2013]

  Regarding the "Wish List" for the audiophile oriented AOIP device. I agree with those ideas already put forward and want to add a couple others.
 
First. Changing the color might be a good idea. Especially for those of us with wives, domestic partners, significant others... etc.
 
I have my D16 tucked in a cabinet with blackout paper in front and the back open for cooling. 
 
I do not think that RED will pass the WAF test regardless of how amazing it sounds.
 
Black and or silver would go better in a home environment. Might as well match up with the other gear!
 
 
Second. I like the idea of a DC power port for adding an LPS but would not like to get a toss-away wall-wart with the new device when the internal PS sounds so good right now. 
 
Perhaps the new device could keep the present internal PS but have a switch for allowing external DC power. This would also allow folks to not feel like they had to spend more money to replace the wall-wart right away. Additionally having the external port specified for an easily found voltage might be good. 12v or 5v, whatever works internally. Those LPS's are easy to find and do not involve an adjustable regulator with all of the throw-away heat...

Yes I think black or sliver is generic and fits with most other gear.
 
Perhaps the new dissappearing Vantablack!
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vantablack

 

[rb2013]

   
+1
 
As long as we are trying to provide input for the new audiophile AOIP device lets start with 24/192. Perhaps address DSD later if the market responds...

++1

 

[mhamel]

 
I agree - but I think the point the OP was referring to was HQ Player's use of high oversampling on Redbook files to improve SQ.  This idea of oversampling to improve SQ has been around for a long time (not just in D-S DAC chips to deal with extreme switching noise).
 
I seem to remember a French audio company that used FPGA to extreme upsample RedbookCD's in their CD player - that was 10 yrs ago.
 
Now this is what Mutec is doing in there MC-3+USB.  And what the NAA does?
 
It's been around a long time - just now it's a bigger marketing buzzword 'gotta have'.
 
My APL DAC upsamples to 211k Redbook.

 
Yep, I do get that - I quoted this particular conversation but my statement was more generic in terms of hearing a lot of dismissal in the audiophile community of products that won't go above 192KHz as dead end or not good enough. Oversampling, when done well, can indeed improve sound quality, at least to my ears, I agree with that, too.

 

[mhamel]

 
++1

 
Agreed... if the content is out there, then by all means, but if we want Focusrite to listen and put out a consumer-oriented "audiophile" box, our best bet is if they build it around the Audinate module that exists today.

 

[occamsrazor]

 
If you read back toward the beginning of the thread - I reposted some of his comments from back in 2014 - I'll repost here:
 

 
I really have no idea the point you are trying to make by reposting all those comments by Miska about UPNP & DLNA.
I was talking about HQPlayer and NAA endpoints, and whether the NAA protocol and endpoint functionality could be floated off into a separate virtual soundcard product.
Given neither HQP nor NAA uses UPNP or DLNA, I fail to see the relevance.....

 

[rb2013]

   
Agreed... if the content is out there, then by all means, but if we want Focusrite to listen and put out a consumer-oriented "audiophile" box, our best bet is if they build it around the Audinate module that exists today.

Absolutely - and it really is plenty.  All this theory is fine - but it comes down to implementation and SQ for me.
 
And the REDNET gear has proven itself to me.